So I tried Orbiter. ..

[maceemiller]

As the title said I tried it. No issues getting into orbit yet the whole experience was as flat as a pancake for me. I'm not sure why it seemed flat as it looked great but I did miss my Kerbals. Anyone else felt this way?

Edited April 22, 2017 by maceemiller
Spelling

[The Raging Sandwich]

The only thing that's easy to do is to launch a shuttle into orbit. And that's it.

[Razorforce7]

@The Raging Sandwich Out of the box, yes.

The thing with Orbiter is that it is bare bone naked, without something that covers it to make it look dressed up. Calling it a flat pancake is another way of putting it. Playing orbiter out of the box is like playing ksp 0.15 without mods.
Although the comparison is not completely accurate since ksp 0.15 had no other planets. You get my point, hopefully.

If you want to enjoy Orbiter you will have to download stuff. There are however alot of good looking real life replicas. There are other stock orbiter inspired spaceplanes that are similar to the stock Delta glider. I think they're from a place called Alteaaerospace or something. These are deltaglider inspired craft but can do more or go further.
Navigation can be expanded with futuristic MFD's that suit the cockpit of your Deltaglider.
But most of your Orbiter simulatons will be that, "simulations" and there will be little flying. Because these will be real life replicas with automated launch programs.
Orbiter is much more oriented at the simulation of spaceflight. Atleast it goes as far as to replicate spaceflight simulations, that targets especially the piloting part of it.
And when I mean simulation I mean that thouroughly. There is for example a dedicated Apollo 11 install called "NASSP" which comes clean with all the 100+ missions steps from launch to splash down that the crew had to follow during the actual mission.

From a pure gameplay perspective KSP wins hands down. But Orbiter can be fun to if you know what kinda game it is and how to use it. KSP is a fun game, and orbiter can be but isn't after a fresh install. It is obvious why KSP is more popular then orbiter if you ask me.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Razorforce7

[NorthernDevo]

I get the obvious and cheerful rivalry between the two simulations, but Orbiter and KSP are very different things.

I absolutely adore KSP, but it is extremely restrictive in its approach to space; there's never a time when I feel that "I" am in space - that is one of the things Orbiter offers.

There are no maneuver gizmos, no fun graphics, no little green guys giggling insanely - Orbiter is as realistic as Dr. Schwiegert could make it.

By a very wide margin, the most realism I've ever experienced in Space-sim comes from the AMSO Project; a French add-on for Orbiter: The Apollo Mission Simulator (for Orbiter). It is graphically wonderful, technically difficult and overwhelmingly immersive. The skill in AMSO is designing and carrying out your Apollo mission so that the radio messages - the actual recording of the flights, which are replayed at the correct MET - properly reflect what your ship is actually doing. It takes a little math, a LOT of patience and a rather large sense of wonder. The moment Earth rises above the moon's horizon for the first time...IF you have Columbia properly aligned...is heart-stopping in its power and beauty.

Don't dismiss Orbiter because it's not as joyful as KSP - they are very different and serve different needs. The moment you find the Kerbol system too restrictive...Orbiter will be waiting, to show you what the REAL Solar System is like.

[Nuke]

i had played orbiter prior to ksp. it was pretty much the only newtonian space simulator i knew of at the time. i got to orbit and began exploring the solar system. but the possibilities for the game were somewhat limited. i played with mods for awhile and then gave up. eventually i learned about ksp and that became the more fun newtonian space simulator.

Edited April 24, 2017 by Nuke

[klesh]

3 minutes ago, Nuke said:

 i got to orbit and began exploring the solar system. but the possibilities for the game were somewhat limited.

 

Could you elaborate? I've never tried Orbiter, and dont know how it plays.  If its got the whole solar system, whats limiting? 

[Nuke]

orbiter is scenario based. you usually spawn at some spaceport with a spacecraft, usually kitted out for a particular destination. you launch and go wherever. i seem to recall there being a lunar space port you could land at to refuel. this was useful if you wanted to go to venus or mars. it more deals with space craft operations than mission construction though. easiest way to check it out is to download it, its free, and i strongly suggest reading the manuals. its definitely the geekier simulator.

[Mikki]

15 hours ago, klesh said:

 

Could you elaborate? I've never tried Orbiter, and dont know how it plays.  If its got the whole solar system, whats limiting? 

I played orbiter from its beginnings and it lacks the choice of "engineering" spacecraft yourself.
Vast distances make the void between celestial bodys a abysmal boring place.
Not much to do aside a certain amount of some pseudo lifesupport and ship system management.
But newtonian physics are great, Dr Schweiger is a pioneer nonetheless.
Allways worth to try this gem for anyone interested. It`s free software...

Edited April 25, 2017 by Mikki

[Cydonian Monk]

I tried Orbiter a couple years ago when I bought my current PC. My first launch was the Shuttle, of course, but somehow I messed that up very badly. The Shuttle ended up skidding across the "ocean" and then up onto land and across central Florida. The boosters separated somewhere past Titusville and I decided that was enough. I tried a few other things, but yeah - I agree - the base game is very flat. It shines pretty well when you install mods. 

I'm in this game to build my own spacecraft, so Orbiter really just doesn't do much for me.